| Obviously it depends on the execution but on a general sense, do you like it when antagonists get their redemption arcs or do prefer them to keep their character? |
 |
| Yup. Redemption arcs are some of my favourite arcs in general. |
| I usually dislike them cause they can seem a bit forced and unnecessary. There are some instances where I like the transformation, but most of the time for a "redemption arc" type of thing to work for me is when they have already established from the start that they're sort of an anti-hero or not completely evil/at fault |
| Most of the time i dislike it. I like characters in general (not just villains) to follow their ideals till the end, and a "redemption" would mean either that they weren't as bad (Kirei, Kaiki, Greed, etc...), or that they abandoned their ideals/goals(and i hate this) |
sneed's feed and seed  formerly chuck's |
| Yes. Villains redemption arcs are great. Villains becoming anti-hero are my favorite. |
 |
| I like it more when an antagonist is justified, rather than redeemed. And no, a protagonist being redeemed is annoying to watch. I think that the protagonists in "Kiseijuu and Guilty Crown" were awesome after they stepped over some boundaries. But their redemption almost ruined everything. |
 |
| It depends on the character and what they have done. I usually like villains and the antagonist characters because they were written like that, why would I want to watch characters like that change. Like Yagami Light, for example, I liked how he held onto his ideals to the very end and believed he was right. If they didn't kill him off and made a redemption arc, I probably would've given it a lower score. Edit: I may not be talking about the right thing because I misunderstood the term I think |
| I like when any character is redeemed for their mistakes...so YES ! But for villains and antagonists...I want them to be well written enought from the beginning so that I can understand where they're coming from...no matter how horrible are their actions....Like Makishima, Griffith, Johan or Light....otherwise, they can not be redeemed. Good exemples for antagonists/villains being redeemed are Lelouch from Code Geas and Askeladd from Vinland Saga. |
DoruCatanaMay 5, 2020 10:37 AM
 |
| Hell yeah, especially when they join the protagonists to defeat a bigger villain. Man, I love Symphogear. |
 cunnysseur |
| I think heavily depends on how it's done, but I can't stop thinking about (Avatar:TLA- Very Anime-esque but american). Such na incredible arc throughout the 3 seasons. Very much recommend this show. |
 |
| Yes, bonus point for tragic death or joining the good guys. |
One Piece episode 914 & 915 & 1027 were a mistake and 957 brought the salvation - FMmatron |
| Yeah, I do, unless if they do it by suicide. |
| heh. |
NamikazeHime said: Yup. Redemption arcs are some of my favourite arcs in general. Same,one my favourite tropes.No matter how it's executed it's always a great one in my eyes. |
 |
Kanedgy_ said: I think heavily depends on how it's done, but I can't stop thinking about (Avatar:TLA- Very Anime-esque but american). Such na incredible arc throughout the 3 seasons. Very much recommend this show. Nothing will ever top Zuko's redemption. A lot of things went into, so many highs and lows, and it was paced evenly throughout three seasons. I've yet to see a redemption arc as well-written as his. |
|
| I don't think it terms of "right" and "wrong", so no. I don't give a shit most of the time. |
| Not usually, but depending on the circumstances it can be good. A very very bad example is the cell ripoff from HxH who doesn’t even deserve to be acknowledged by his name. He’s introduced as a sadist, has a desire for world conquest, and shows no remorse killing anything from humans, to followers, to his own mother. Then after losing a few board games to a disabled girl he turns into Gandhi. The most illogical, spur of the moment, uncharacteristic personality change ever. It was absolute trash and I can not respect the opinion of people who bought into this trash character. Sorry, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but liking the cell ripoff is a bad one. Theee excellent examples are Itachi (naruto), the blind dude (bleach) and gin (bleach). All are definitely villains, having done many heinous things. However they have underlying motives from the start, that are slowly hinted at and revealed as the show progresses. These are thought out characters, they have preexisting backstories, their actions have motives, and they stay true to their characteristics. It’s arguable if any of these three actually got redemption of any sort, but I would say Gin and Itachi definitely did. Another bad example, but not nearly as bad as the cell ripoff from HxH, would be Sasuke (Naruto). Similar to my good examples, he has a backstory and his actions suit his personality and motives... to an extent.... but wow did they go overboard with him. I’ve been around several mentally unstable people irl, but Sasuke is just rediculous. Light (Death Note) falls victim to this as well, a potentially good character being overdone. |
| Lolicons are scum. BABYMETAL is more metal than Metallica. Naruto is objectively the best anime ever. HxH 99' is decent. HxH 11' is bad. |
| Honestly I prefer my villains to be irredeemably evil. |
 |
| Depends on how the villain is written, if it's a morally ambiguous villain from the get-go and the show does a decent job at making his motives at least understandable, then I see no problem. |
| Who are you and why do you show your hostility towards a complete stranger whom you've not once spoken with before. Are you seriously asking to get blocked? Well, if that's what your intent is; to tempt me into throwing hands with someone as lowly and insignificant as you, then i may grant your wish provided you articulate yourself a bit better when trying to spite a person of my wavelength. |
| need context for sure i prefer antagonists to have character development over the course but not that they change their entire mindset and become morally good |
| I feel like the execution part is really important. Like most of the time villain redemption arcs are just a matter of either someone else being an even bigger asshole than the ""main"" villain(s) (Cross Ange is completely guilty of this), or some dum dum reasoning that suddenly changes their entire mindset. In those cases then no, because it's pretty stupid most of the time but if it were a case of which the villain actually realized their faults/wrongdoings and actively tried to change them, then I think it can be pretty good. Inuyashiki iirc had something like this |
 'On-Hold' is another way for a completionist to say 'Dropped' |
| No, that defeats the purpose of a villain to begin with, which is to set forth the events that contrast the efforts of the protagonist. Nothing more, nothing less. Antagonist redemption could be useful if it becomes a necessary construct to directly tie in with a "real" villain, but most of the time it's used just so the author could recycle his characters. Let's be honest: It's lazy, plain and simple. The author spends all this time developing this character, which is supposed to be the bad guy. Then he gets cold feet and decides he doesn't want to dispose of him after all. Maybe he thinks the villain is too nicely written, he spent too much effort into the character, and he doesn't want to bother building up a new character. So he destroys his own creation -- the villain -- to save himself some work, by "redeeming" him. Most of the time, still, this becomes just a sappy excuse for this character to tag along with some ridiculous excuse such as "I want to observe you" or "I'm doing this for honor" or "I want to see what adventures you go on next." Despite that they were just fighting to the death in the previous episode and shit was super personal. In other cases, the villain pulls off a self-serving "sacrifice" just so the author could make an excuse to segue into a flashback he had in his mind but couldn't find out where else to place it. He didn't take the hint: If it doesn't belong anywhere, then it doesn't belong anywhere! Moreover, 99% of the time, it just cheapens the motivations of the villain, as if his whole philosophy could be instantaneously reversed by a single defeat, or that he could reverse his whole life work on a whim. It's plot breaking and character breaking. It's unfortunate that it's such an accepted practice in the fan base, as it would encourage authors to be lazy in the industry. It's just another of a long laundry list of reasons why so few anime even aspire to be great. I'm fine with ambivalent villains, as long as they begin ambivalent, such that they didn't just change their mind on a whim, or the author didn't pull a cheap shot flashback to reframe their actions all along, or that the protagonists don't treat him as an evil villain, and then begin to notice his ambivalence on a whim. In other words, just so we're clear, don't confuse an ambivalent villain with bad writing!! |
katsucatsMay 5, 2020 4:39 PM
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Depends on what they've done. But most of the time no, because usually it's not handled very well, at least from what i've seen. |
Jess07May 5, 2020 9:16 PM
More topics from this board
» π₯ Best Husbando of the Past Eras TournamentSupersonic_Pain - 5 minutes ago |
0 |
by Supersonic_Pain
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» Recovering some of the magic of broadcast TVvalico - Yesterday |
13 |
by Galletita
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» Are you a failed cinephile?thewiru - 3 hours ago |
17 |
by thewiru
»»
8 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Are anitubers are vtubers more cancerous?qasdrtfgbhtghnm - 3 hours ago |
3 |
by Twintail_Daemon
»»
9 minutes ago |
|
» Which anime, according to you, should be ranked #1 on MALselfawarecorpse - 11 hours ago |
22 |
by Twintail_Daemon
»»
16 minutes ago |